Logical quantum processor based on reconfigurable atom arrays

Abstract

Suppressing errors is the central challenge for useful quantum computing 1 , requiring quantum error correction (QEC) 2–6 for large-scale processing. However, the overhead in the realization of error-corrected ‘logical’ qubits, in which information is encoded across many physical qubits for redundancy 2–4 , poses substantial challenges to large-scale logical quantum computing. Here we report the realization of a programmable quantum processor based on encoded logical qubits operating with up to 280 physical qubits. Using logical-level control and a zoned architecture in reconfigurable neutral-atom arrays 7 , our system combines high two-qubit gate fidelities 8 , arbitrary connectivity 7,9 , as well as fully programmable single-qubit rotations and mid-circuit readout 10–15 . Operating this logical processor with various types of encoding, we demonstrate improvement of a two-qubit logic gate by scaling surface-code 6 distance from d = 3 to d = 7, preparation of colour-code qubits with break-even fidelities 5 , fault-tolerant creation of logical Greenberger–Horne–Zeilinger (GHZ) states and feedforward entanglement teleportation, as well as operation of 40 colour-code qubits. Finally, using 3D [[8,3,2]] code blocks 16,17 , we realize computationally complex sampling circuits 18 with up to 48 logical qubits entangled with hypercube connectivity 19 with 228 logical two-qubit gates and 48 logical CCZ gates 20 . We find that this logical encoding substantially improves algorithmic performance with error detection, outperforming physical-qubit fidelities at both cross-entropy benchmarking and quantum simulations of fast scrambling 21,22 . These results herald the advent of early error-corrected quantum computation and chart a path towards large-scale logical processors.

Full text

Its licence does not allow us to show the full text. Read it at PubMed Central:

References 113

1. 1.

   Preskill J. Quantum computing in the NISQ era and beyond. Quantum. 2018;2:79.

   Not in our library10.22331/q-2018-08-06-79 (opens in a new tab)

2. 2.

   Shor, P. W. in Proc. 37th Conference on Foundations of Computer Science 56–65 (IEEE, 1996).

   Not in our library

3. 3.

   Steane A. Multiple-particle interference and quantum error correction. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 1996;452:2551-2577.

   Not in our library10.1098/rspa.1996.0136 (opens in a new tab)

4. 4.

   Dennis E, Kitaev A, Landahl A, Preskill J. Topological quantum memory. J. Math. Phys. 2002;43:4452-4505.

   Not in our library10.1063/1.1499754 (opens in a new tab)

5. 5.

   Ryan-Anderson, C. et al. Implementing fault-tolerant entangling gates on the five-qubit code and the color code. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/2208.01863 (2022).

   Not in our library

6. 6.
   Suppressing quantum errors by scaling a surface code logical qubit · 2023

   No notice
7. 7.
   A quantum processor based on coherent transport of entangled atom arrays · 2022

   No notice
8. 8.

   Evered SJ, et al. High-fidelity parallel entangling gates on a neutral-atom quantum computer. Nature. 2023;622:268-272.

   Not in our library10.1038/s41586-023-06481-y (opens in a new tab)

9. 9.

   Beugnon J, et al. Two-dimensional transport and transfer of a single atomic qubit in optical tweezers. Nat. Phys. 2007;3:696-699.

   Not in our library10.1038/nphys698 (opens in a new tab)

10. 10.

    Deist E, et al. Mid-circuit cavity measurement in a neutral atom array. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2022;129:203602.

    Not in our library10.1103/physrevlett.129.203602 (opens in a new tab)

11. 11.

    Singh K, et al. Mid-circuit correction of correlated phase errors using an array of spectator qubits. Science. 2023;380:1265-1269.

    Not in our library10.1126/science.ade5337 (opens in a new tab)

12. 12.

    Graham, T. M. et al. Midcircuit measurements on a single-species neutral alkali atom quantum processor. Phys. Rev. X13, 041051 (2023).

    Not in our library

13. 13.

    Ma S, et al. High-fidelity gates and mid-circuit erasure conversion in an atomic qubit. Nature. 2023;622:279-284.

    Not in our library10.1038/s41586-023-06438-1 (opens in a new tab)

14. 14.

    Lis, J. W. et al. Midcircuit operations using the omg architecture in neutral atom arrays. Phys. Rev. X13, 041035 (2023).

    Not in our library

15. 15.

    Norcia, M. A. et al. Midcircuit qubit measurement and rearrangement in a 171Yb atomic array. Phys. Rev. X13, 041034 (2023).

    Not in our library

16. 16.

    Campbell, E. T. The smallest interesting colour code. Earl T. Campbellhttps://earltcampbell.com/2016/09/26/the-smallest-interesting-colour-code/ (2016).

    Not in our library

17. 17.

    Vasmer M, Kubica A. Morphing quantum codes. Phys. Rev. Appl. 2022;10:030319.

    Not in our library

18. 18.

    Arute F, et al. Quantum supremacy using a programmable superconducting processor. Nature. 2019;574:505-510.

    Not in our library10.1038/s41586-019-1666-5 (opens in a new tab)

19. 19.

    Kuriyattil S, Hashizume T, Bentsen G, Daley AJ. Onset of scrambling as a dynamical transition in tunable-range quantum circuits. PRX Quantum. 2023;4:030325.

    Not in our library10.1103/prxquantum.4.030325 (opens in a new tab)

20. 20.

    Bremner MJ, Montanaro A, Shepherd DJ. Average-case complexity versus approximate simulation of commuting quantum computations. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2016;117:080501.

    Not in our library10.1103/physrevlett.117.080501 (opens in a new tab)

21. 21.

    Daley AJ, Pichler H, Schachenmayer J, Zoller P. Measuring entanglement growth in quench dynamics of bosons in an optical lattice. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2012;109:020505.

    Not in our library10.1103/physrevlett.109.020505 (opens in a new tab)

22. 22.

    Huang HY, et al. Quantum advantage in learning from experiments. Science. 2022;376:1182-1186.

    Not in our library10.1126/science.abn7293 (opens in a new tab)

23. 23.

    Gidney C, Ekerå M. How to factor 2048 bit RSA integers in 8 hours using 20 million noisy qubits. Quantum. 2021;5:433.

    Not in our library10.22331/q-2021-04-15-433 (opens in a new tab)

24. 24.

    Fowler AG, Mariantoni M, Martinis JM, Cleland AN. Surface codes: towards practical large-scale quantum computation. Phys. Rev. A. 2012;86:032324.

    Not in our library10.1103/physreva.86.032324 (opens in a new tab)

25. 25.

    Self, C. N., Benedetti, M. & Amaro, D. Protecting expressive circuits with a quantum error detection code. Nat. Phys.10.1038/s41567-023-02282-2 (2024).

    Not in our library

26. 26.

    Honciuc Menendez, D., Ray, A. & Vasmer, M. Implementing fault-tolerant non-Clifford gates using the [[8,3,2]] color code. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/2309.08663 (2023).

    Not in our library

27. 27.

    Wang, Y. et al. Fault-tolerant one-bit addition with the smallest interesting colour code. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/2309.09893 (2023).

    Not in our library10.1126/sciadv.ado9024 (opens in a new tab)

28. 28.

    Andersen TI, et al. Non-Abelian braiding of graph vertices in a superconducting processor. Nature. 2023;618:264-269.

    Not in our library10.1038/s41586-023-05954-4 (opens in a new tab)

29. 29.

    Patterson, D. A. & Hennessy, J. L. Computer Organization and Design: The Hardware/Software Interface. RISC-V Edition (Morgan Kaufmann, 2018).

    Not in our library

30. 30.

    Ebadi S, et al. Quantum phases of matter on a 256-atom programmable quantum simulator. Nature. 2021;595:227-232.

    Not in our library10.1038/s41586-021-03582-4 (opens in a new tab)

31. 31.

    Scholl P, et al. Quantum simulation of 2D antiferromagnets with hundreds of Rydberg atoms. Nature. 2021;595:233-238.

    Not in our library10.1038/s41586-021-03585-1 (opens in a new tab)

32. 32.

    Jaksch D, et al. Fast quantum gates for neutral atoms. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2000;85:2208-2211.

    Not in our library10.1103/physrevlett.85.2208 (opens in a new tab)

33. 33.

    Scholl P, et al. Erasure conversion in a high-fidelity Rydberg quantum simulator. Nature. 2023;622:273-278.

    Not in our library10.1038/s41586-023-06516-4 (opens in a new tab)

34. 34.

    Graham TM, et al. Multi-qubit entanglement and algorithms on a neutral-atom quantum computer. Nature. 2022;604:457-462.

    Not in our library10.1038/s41586-022-04603-6 (opens in a new tab)

35. 35.

    Cong I, et al. Hardware-efficient, fault-tolerant quantum computation with Rydberg atoms. Phys. Rev. X. 2022;12:021049.

    Not in our library

36. 36.

    Beverland ME, Kubica A, Svore KM. Cost of universality: a comparative study of the overhead of state distillation and code switching with color codes. PRX Quantum. 2021;2:020341.

    Not in our library10.1103/prxquantum.2.020341 (opens in a new tab)

37. 37.

    Bombín H. Gauge color codes: optimal transversal gates and gauge fixing in topological stabilizer codes. New J. Phys. 2015;17:083002.

    Not in our library10.1088/1367-2630/17/8/083002 (opens in a new tab)

38. 38.

    Goto H. Minimizing resource overheads for fault-tolerant preparation of encoded states of the Steane code. Sci. Rep. 2016;6:19578.

    Not in our library10.1038/srep19578 (opens in a new tab)

39. 39.

    Flammia ST, Liu YK. Direct fidelity estimation from few Pauli measurements. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2011;106:230501.

    Not in our library10.1103/physrevlett.106.230501 (opens in a new tab)

40. 40.

    Egan L, et al. Fault-tolerant control of an error-corrected qubit. Nature. 2021;598:281-286.

    Not in our library10.1038/s41586-021-03928-y (opens in a new tab)

41. 41.

    Postler L, et al. Demonstration of fault-tolerant universal quantum gate operations. Nature. 2022;605:675-680.

    Not in our library10.1038/s41586-022-04721-1 (opens in a new tab)

42. 42.

    Eastin B, Knill E. Restrictions on transversal encoded quantum gate sets. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2009;102:110502.

    Not in our library10.1103/physrevlett.102.110502 (opens in a new tab)

43. 43.

    Brown BJ. A fault-tolerant non-Clifford gate for the surface code in two dimensions. Sci. Adv. 2020;6:eaay4929.

    Not in our library10.1126/sciadv.aay4929 (opens in a new tab)

44. 44.

    Aaronson S, Gottesman D. Improved simulation of stabilizer circuits. Phys. Rev. A. 2004;70:052328.

    Not in our library10.1103/physreva.70.052328 (opens in a new tab)

45. 45.

    Mezher R, Ghalbouni J, Dgheim J, Markham D. Fault-tolerant quantum speedup from constant depth quantum circuits. Phys. Rev. Res. 2020;2:033444.

    Not in our library10.1103/physrevresearch.2.033444 (opens in a new tab)

46. 46.

    Paletta, L., Leverrier, A., Sarlette, A., Mirrahimi, M. & Vuillot, C. Robust sparse IQP sampling in constant depth. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/2307.10729 (2023).

    Not in our library

47. 47.

    Shaw, A. L. et al. Benchmarking highly entangled states on a 60-atom analog quantum simulator. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/2308.07914 (2023).

    Not in our library10.1038/s41586-024-07173-x (opens in a new tab)

48. 48.

    Wu Y, et al. Strong quantum computational advantage using a superconducting quantum processor. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2021;127:180501.

    Not in our library10.1103/physrevlett.127.180501 (opens in a new tab)

49. 49.

    Bravyi S, Englbrecht M, König R, Peard N. Correcting coherent errors with surface codes. npj Quantum Inf. 2018;4:55.

    Not in our library10.1038/s41534-018-0106-y (opens in a new tab)

50. 50.

    Bravyi S, et al. Simulation of quantum circuits by low-rank stabilizer decompositions. Quantum. 2019;3:181.

    Not in our library10.22331/q-2019-09-02-181 (opens in a new tab)

51. 51.

    Sekino Y, Susskind L. Fast scramblers. J. High Energy Phys. 2008;2008:065.

    Not in our library10.1088/1126-6708/2008/10/065 (opens in a new tab)

52. 52.

    Hangleiter, D. & Gullans, M. J. Bell sampling from quantum circuits. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/2306.00083 (2023).

    Not in our library10.1103/physrevlett.133.020601 (opens in a new tab)

53. 53.

    Haug T, Kim MS. Scalable measures of magic resource for quantum computers. PRX Quantum. 2023;4:010301.

    Not in our library10.1103/prxquantum.4.010301 (opens in a new tab)

54. 54.
    Evidence for the utility of quantum computing before fault tolerance · 2023

    No notice
55. 55.

    Bravyi, S. et al. High-threshold and low-overhead fault-tolerant quantum memory. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/2308.07915 (2023).

    Not in our library10.1038/s41586-024-07107-7 (opens in a new tab)

56. 56.

    Xu, Q. et al. Constant-overhead fault-tolerant quantum computation with reconfigurable atom arrays. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/2308.08648 (2023).

    Not in our library

57. 57.

    Wu Y, Kolkowitz S, Puri S, Thompson JD. Erasure conversion for fault-tolerant quantum computing in alkaline earth Rydberg atom arrays. Nat. Commun. 2022;13:4657.

    Not in our library10.1038/s41467-022-32094-6 (opens in a new tab)

58. 58.

    Dordević T, et al. Entanglement transport and a nanophotonic interface for atoms in optical tweezers. Science. 2021;373:1511-1514.

    Not in our library10.1126/science.abi9917 (opens in a new tab)

59. 59.

    Tao, R., Ammenwerth, M., Gyger, F., Bloch, I. & Zeiher, J. High-fidelity detection of large-scale atom arrays in an optical lattice. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/2309.04717 (2023).

    Not in our library10.1103/physrevlett.133.013401 (opens in a new tab)

60. 60.

    Xu W, et al. Fast preparation and detection of a Rydberg qubit using atomic ensembles. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2021;127:050501.

    Not in our library10.1103/physrevlett.127.050501 (opens in a new tab)

61. 61.

    Litinski, D. & Nickerson, N. Active volume: an architecture for efficient fault-tolerant quantum computers with limited non-local connections. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/2211.15465 (2022).

    Not in our library

62. 62.

    Barredo D, De Léséleuc S, Lienhard V, Lahaye T, Browaeys A. An atom-by-atom assembler of defect-free arbitrary two-dimensional atomic arrays. Science. 2016;354:1021-1023.

    Not in our library10.1126/science.aah3778 (opens in a new tab)

63. 63.

    Levine H, et al. Dispersive optics for scalable Raman driving of hyperfine qubits. Phys. Rev. A. 2022;105:032618.

    Not in our library10.1103/physreva.105.032618 (opens in a new tab)

64. 64.

    Jandura S, Pupillo G. Time-optimal two- and three-qubit gates for Rydberg atoms. Quantum. 2022;6:712.

    Not in our library10.22331/q-2022-05-13-712 (opens in a new tab)

65. 65.

    Pagano, A. et al. Error budgeting for a controlled-phase gate with strontium-88 Rydberg atoms. Phys. Rev. Res.4, 033019 (2022).

    Not in our library

66. 66.

    Lengwenus, A., Kruse, J., Schlosser, M., Tichelmann, S. & Birkl, G. Coherent transport of atomic quantum states in a scalable shift register. Phys. Rev. Lett.105, 170502 (2010).

    Not in our library10.1103/physrevlett.105.170502 (opens in a new tab)

67. 67.

    Schlosser, M., Tichelmann, S., Kruse, J. & Birkl, G. Scalable architecture for quantum information processing with atoms in optical micro-structures. Quantum Inf. Process.10, 907 (2011).

    Not in our library

68. 68.

    Levine H, et al. Parallel implementation of high-fidelity multiqubit gates with neutral atoms. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2019;123:170503.

    Not in our library10.1103/physrevlett.123.170503 (opens in a new tab)

69. 69.

    Tan, D. B., Bluvstein, D., Lukin, M. D. & Cong, J. Compiling quantum circuits for dynamically field-programmable neutral atoms array processors. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/2306.03487 (2023).

    Not in our library

70. 70.

    Wimperis S. Broadband, narrowband, and passband composite pulses for use in advanced NMR experiments. J. Magn. Reson. A. 1994;109:221-231.

    Not in our library10.1006/jmra.1994.1159 (opens in a new tab)

71. 71.

    Cummins HK, Llewellyn G, Jones JA. Tackling systematic errors in quantum logic gates with composite rotations. Phys. Rev. A. 2003;67:042308.

    Not in our library10.1103/physreva.67.042308 (opens in a new tab)

72. 72.

    Barnes K, et al. Assembly and coherent control of a register of nuclear spin qubits. Nat. Commun. 2022;13:2779.

    Not in our library10.1038/s41467-022-29977-z (opens in a new tab)

73. 73.

    Le Kien F, Schneeweiss P, Rauschenbeutel A. Dynamical polarizability of atoms in arbitrary light fields: General theory and application to cesium. Eur. Phys. J. D. 2013;67:92.

    Not in our library10.1140/epjd/e2013-30729-x (opens in a new tab)

74. 74.

    Hutzler NR, Liu LR, Yu Y, Ni KK. Eliminating light shifts for single atom trapping. New J. Phys. 2017;19:023007.

    Not in our library10.1088/1367-2630/aa5a3b (opens in a new tab)

75. 75.

    Shea ME, Baker PM, Joseph JA, Kim J, Gauthier DJ. Submillisecond, nondestructive, time-resolved quantum-state readout of a single, trapped neutral atom. Phys. Rev. A. 2020;102:053101.

    Not in our library10.1103/physreva.102.053101 (opens in a new tab)

76. 76.

    Gidney C. Stim: a fast stabilizer circuit simulator. Quantum. 2021;5:497.

    Not in our library10.22331/q-2021-07-06-497 (opens in a new tab)

77. 77.

    Higgott O, Bohdanowicz TC, Kubica A, Flammia ST, Campbell ET. Improved decoding of circuit noise and fragile boundaries of tailored surface codes. Phys. Rev. X. 2023;13:031007.

    Not in our library

78. 78.

    Gottesman, D. Opportunities and challenges in fault-tolerant quantum computation. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/2210.15844 (2022).

    Not in our library

79. 79.

    Delfosse, N. & Paetznick, A. Spacetime codes of Clifford circuits. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/2304.05943 (2023).

    Not in our library

80. 80.

    Steane AM. Active stabilization, quantum computation, and quantum state synthesis. Phys. Rev. Lett. 1997;78:2252.

    Not in our library10.1103/physrevlett.78.2252 (opens in a new tab)

81. 81.

    McEwen, M., Bacon, D. & Gidney, C. Relaxing hardware requirements for surface code circuits using time-dynamics. Quantum7, 1172 (2023).

    Not in our library

82. 82.

    Gurobi Optimization. Gurobi optimizer reference manual. Gurobi Optimizationhttps://www.gurobi.com/documentation/current/refman/index.html (2023).

    Not in our library

83. 83.

    Landahl, A. J., Anderson, J. T. & Rice, P. R. Fault-tolerant quantum computing with color codes. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/1108.5738 (2011).

    Not in our library

84. 84.

    Monz T, et al. 14-qubit entanglement: creation and coherence. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2011;106:130506.

    Not in our library10.1103/physrevlett.106.130506 (opens in a new tab)

85. 85.

    Gottesman, D. Stabilizer Codes and Quantum Error Correction. Thesis, California Institute of Technology (1997).

    Not in our library

86. 86.

    Knill E. Quantum computing with realistically noisy devices. Nature. 2005;434:39-44.

    Not in our library10.1038/nature03350 (opens in a new tab)

87. 87.

    Shor PW. Scheme for reducing decoherence in quantum computer memory. Phys. Rev. A. 1995;52:R2493.

    Not in our library10.1103/physreva.52.r2493 (opens in a new tab)

88. 88.

    Krinner S, et al. Realizing repeated quantum error correction in a distance-three surface code. Nature. 2022;605:669-674.

    Not in our library10.1038/s41586-022-04566-8 (opens in a new tab)

89. 89.

    Horsman C, Fowler AG, Devitt S, Meter RV. Surface code quantum computing by lattice surgery. New J. Phys. 2012;14:123011.

    Not in our library10.1088/1367-2630/14/12/123011 (opens in a new tab)

90. 90.

    Tóth G, Gühne O. Entanglement detection in the stabilizer formalism. Phys. Rev. A. 2005;72:022340.

    Not in our library10.1103/physreva.72.022340 (opens in a new tab)

91. 91.

    Kubica A, Yoshida B, Pastawski F. Unfolding the color code. New J. Phys. 2015;17:083026.

    Not in our library10.1088/1367-2630/17/8/083026 (opens in a new tab)

92. 92.

    Chamberland C, Kubica A, Yoder TJ, Zhu G. Triangular color codes on trivalent graphs with flag qubits. New J. Phys. 2020;22:023019.

    Not in our library10.1088/1367-2630/ab68fd (opens in a new tab)

93. 93.

    Kubica A, Beverland ME. Universal transversal gates with color codes: a simplified approach. Phys. Rev. A. 2015;91:032330.

    Not in our library10.1103/physreva.91.032330 (opens in a new tab)

94. 94.

    Mi X, et al. Information scrambling in quantum circuits. Science. 2021;374:1479-1483.

    Not in our library10.1126/science.abg5029 (opens in a new tab)

95. 95.

    Linke NM. Fault-tolerant quantum error detection. Sci. Adv. 2017;3:e1701074.

    Not in our library10.1126/sciadv.1701074 (opens in a new tab)

96. 96.

    Hashizume T, Bentsen GS, Weber S, Daley AJ. Deterministic fast scrambling with neutral atom arrays. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2021;126:200603.

    Not in our library10.1103/physrevlett.126.200603 (opens in a new tab)

97. 97.

    Jia Y, Verbaarschot JJ. Chaos on the hypercube. J. High Energy Phys. 2020;2020:154.

    Not in our library10.1007/jhep11(2020)154 (opens in a new tab)

98. 98.

    Bremner MJ, Jozsa R, Shepherd DJ. Classical simulation of commuting quantum computations implies collapse of the polynomial hierarchy. Proc. R. Soc. A Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 2011;467:459-472.

    Not in our library

99. 99.

    Hangleiter D, Bermejo-Vega J, Schwarz M, Eisert J. Anticoncentration theorems for schemes showing a quantum speedup. Quantum. 2018;2:65.

    Not in our library10.22331/q-2018-05-22-65 (opens in a new tab)

100. 100.

     Bouland A, Fefferman B, Nirkhe C, Vazirani U. On the complexity and verification of quantum random circuit sampling. Nat. Phys. 2019;15:159-163.

     Not in our library10.1038/s41567-018-0318-2 (opens in a new tab)

101. 101.

     Bremner MJ, Montanaro A, Shepherd DJ. Achieving quantum supremacy with sparse and noisy commuting quantum computations. Quantum. 2017;1:8.

     Not in our library10.22331/q-2017-04-25-8 (opens in a new tab)

102. 102.

     Gao, X. et al. Limitations of linear cross-entropy as a measure for quantum advantage. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/2112.01657 (2021).

     Not in our library

103. 103.

     Morvan, A. et al. Phase transition in random circuit sampling. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/2304.11119 (2023).

     Not in our library

104. 104.

     Ware, B. et al. A sharp phase transition in linear cross-entropy benchmarking. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.04954 (2023).

     Not in our library

105. 105.

     Shepherd D, Bremner MJ. Temporally unstructured quantum computation. Proc. R. Soc. A Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 2009;465:1413-1439.

     Not in our library

106. 106.

     Pan F, Zhang P. Simulation of quantum circuits using the big-batch tensor network method. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2022;128:030501.

     Not in our library10.1103/physrevlett.128.030501 (opens in a new tab)

107. 107.

     Boixo S, et al. Characterizing quantum supremacy in near-term devices. Nat. Phys. 2018;14:595-600.

     Not in our library10.1038/s41567-018-0124-x (opens in a new tab)

108. 108.

     Zhong H-S, et al. Quantum computational advantage using photons. Science. 2020;370:1460-1463.

     Not in our library10.1126/science.abe8770 (opens in a new tab)

109. 109.
     Quantum computational advantage with a programmable photonic processor · 2022

     No notice
110. 110.

     Iverson JK, Preskill J. Coherence in logical quantum channels. New J. Phys. 2020;22:073066.

     Not in our library10.1088/1367-2630/ab8e5c (opens in a new tab)

111. 111.

     Iyer P, Poulin D. A small quantum computer is needed to optimize fault-tolerant protocols. Quantum Sci. Technol. 2017;3:030504.

     Not in our library10.1088/2058-9565/aab73c (opens in a new tab)

112. 112.

     Kaufman AM, et al. Quantum thermalization through entanglement in an isolated many-body system. Science. 2016;353:794-800.

     Not in our library10.1126/science.aaf6725 (opens in a new tab)

113. 113.

     Brydges T, et al. Probing Rényi entanglement entropy via randomized measurements. Science. 2019;364:260-263.

     Not in our library10.1126/science.aau4963 (opens in a new tab)

Questions about this paper

Reads

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.